The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies
MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Netflix’s House Of Cards

So the big grab at the top is talking to camera while no one else is aware of the 4th wall being broken. Iffy. The wave would have been more effective off of a voice over… an unexpected beat instead of a payoff right in line with the first dialogue.

One journalist on the show… complete whore. Does anyone – even Nikki Finke – lie down that overtly?

Spacey can do this in his sleep… and it feels a little like he is doing just that. I am fascinate by the choice… all minor keys… but low key Spacey without the nuke going off? Great, great actor, but not his thing, really.

And the next-to closing line makes no sense. “Take a step back. Look at the bigger picture. That’s how you devour a whale, one bite at a time.” That’s not the big picture, really… that’s the small picture, no? The small bites that eventually change the big picture. I’m guessing that we are missing lines in between and that someone really liked that dialogue.

Is this a vampire series without the blood? Given the talent involved, my guess is that the show is going to be a lot better than this trailer. Nice to see a show, though, that will drive grandma crazing, screaming over and over, “Turn on a light! This is no good for your eyes!”

On the business side… there is a reason why this dropped AFTER the quarterlies. It probably won’t hurt anything, but it certainly doesn’t look like a game changer either.

13 Responses to “Netflix’s House Of Cards”

  1. Captain_Celluloid says:

    Certainly looks like FIncher has significantly raised the bar for
    TV — can we really call it TV any more. The look is wonderful as to be expected; FIncher channels Gordon WIllis view of the 70′s yet a again [ which I love. ] LOVE that he’s doing the series letterboxed 2.35; only a FIncher would have that kind of clout AND makes it work for the story. I agree that Spacey comes off the tad low-key if almost awkward in this trailer; I will also guess he will be much better in context. Amazing cast full of under used yet terrific actors. DAMN looks like I’ll have to hold on to my NETFLIX account a little longer . . . but I do hope they will release on Blu Ray ala HBO.

  2. DiscoNap says:

    The original miniseries is pretty great, and the device ends up working well. As with Veep, I’m not sure if it translates as well to our form of government, where fortunes and position can’t change quite as quickly.

  3. dan says:

    I think it looks stunning. I don’t know why the breaking the fourth wall is so “iffy.” As far as I can tell, it works.

    Are you at all familiar with the original BBC series, by any chance?

  4. David Poland says:

    I have no problem with the 4th wall being broken. In the context of this trailer, however, it doesn’t play as well as it should. Plays like a trick, not an effective narrative device.

    And no, haven’t watched the original.

  5. sanj says:

    Kevin Spacey keeps wearing suits – it makes him look super smart… plus he’s always yelling at people.
    that gets him awards everytime.

    on showtimes house of lies – Don Cheadle talks to the camera …it works there.

    DP – get a house of lies dp/30 – Kristen Bell power!

  6. palmtree says:

    This looks phenomenal.

    Now, will they please start trailering Arrested Development?

  7. Rashad says:

    Spacey’s accent is horrible.

  8. Js Partisan says:

    This looks tremendous and it totally looks like a game changer. David, there comes a point where you may have to accept that Netflix aren’t a complete bunch of loons, and that you are out to lunch when it comes to this trailer.

  9. jujuju says:

    choices made by spacey and fincher is ‘iffy’… that’s brilliant. well, ‘brilliant’ may not be the right word. let’s see. i’ll go with ‘spotty’. yes, calling this ‘iffy’ is definitely ‘spotty’.

    this trailer is powerful. if anything is iffy it’s you, poland

  10. Triple Option says:

    Ehh, I’d check it out but I’m not 100% sold on it. I think in general I’d prefer a 1st person voice over to breaking the 4th wall as it won’t take me out of the story or have it lose cred.

    It looks like it could get really trashy w/a buncha people sleeping around and things get all gossipy and backstabbing which yes happens in politics but I’d rather see strategic manuevering than sensationalism. I’ll just have to see what it’s about. So I guess the trailer’s a success in that I’d consider and likely watch but I’m not a definitely can’t wait to watch.

  11. Think says:

    Okay. We get it. You hate Netflix.

    That was a really fucking weird and hyper OCD piece about a trailer/commercial.

  12. alynch says:

    And don’t even get David started on the credit font.

  13. storymark says:

    Looks damned good to me. Looking forward to it.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“Yes, good movies sprout up, inevitably, in the cracks and seams between the tectonic plates on which all of these franchises stay balanced, and we are reassured of their hardiness. But we don’t see what we don’t see; we don’t see the effort, or the cost of the effort, or the movies of which we’re deprived because of the cost of the effort. Paul Thomas Anderson’s Inherent Vice may have come from a studio, but it still required a substantial chunk of outside financing, and at $35 million, it’s not even that expensive. No studio could find the $8.5 million it cost Dan Gilroy to make Nightcrawler. Birdman cost a mere $18 million and still had to scrape that together at the last minute. Imagine American movie culture for the last few years without Her or Foxcatcher or American Hustle or The Master or Zero Dark Thirty and it suddenly looks markedly more frail—and those movies exist only because of the fairy godmothership of independent producer Megan Ellison. The grace of billionaires is not a great business model on which to hang the hopes of an art form.”
~ Mark Harris On The State Of The Movies

How do you make a Top Ten list? For tax and organizational purposes, I keep a log of every movie I see (Title, year, director, exhibition format, and location the film was viewed in). Anything with an asterisk to the left of its title means it’s a 2014 release (or something I saw at a festival which is somehow in play for the year). If there’s a performance, or sequence, or line of dialogue, even, that strikes me in a certain way, I’ll make a note of it. So when year end consideration time (that is, the month and change out of the year where I feel valued) rolls around, it’s a little easier to go through and pull some contenders for categories. For 2014, I’m voting in three polls: Indiewire, SEFCA (my critics’ guild), and the Muriels. Since Indiewire was first, it required the most consternation. There were lots of films that I simply never had a chance to see, so I just went with my gut. SEFCA requires a lot of hemming and hawing and trying to be strategic, even though there’s none of the in-person skullduggery that I hear of from folk whose critics’ guild is all in the same city. The Muriels is the most fun to contribute to because it’s after the meat market phase of awards season. Also, because it’s at the beginning of next year, I’ll generally have been able to see everything I wanted to by then. I love making hierarchical lists, partially because they are so subjective and mercurial. Every critical proclamation is based on who you are at that moment and what experiences you’ve had up until that point. So they change, and that’s okay. It’s all a weird game of timing and emotional waveforms, and I’m sure a scientist could do an in-depth dissection of the process that leads to the discovery of shocking trends in collective evaluation. But I love the year end awards crush, because I feel somewhat respected and because I have a wild-and-wooly work schedule that has me bouncing around the city to screenings, or power viewing the screeners I get sent.
Jason Shawhan of Nashville Scene Answers CriticWire